I treat Discovery as an alternate universe. If it isn't hurting anyone else, I don't see the problem with treating Spock Prime as a version from a universe different from TOS.
Has the Red Angel moved the show out of the Prime Universe?
- Thread starter Hoity Toity
- Start date
I treat Discovery as an alternate universe. If it isn't hurting anyone else, I don't see the problem with treating Spock Prime as a version from a universe different from TOS.
And that's all well and good, but I just don't see why one would still acknowledge the stuff from 1966-2005 is called "Prime Universe" if the don't acknowledge Nimoy Spock from the Abrams movies is the same character from TOS.
"People are funny" is the best answer I can give. Sometimes our feelings on a subject don't even make sense to ourselves.
I'll have no thoughts about this until after the season finale.
Yep.
Good post. I feel we all learned something.
Again, we're taking continuity FAR more seriously than CBS do. It boggles my mind that they did that "previously on..." harking all the way back to "The Cage", which it's entirely different look, technology, characterisation etc.
By their standard, Nimoy in the reboot movies is definitely the same Spock from TOS, who had an angsty beard phase between "The Cage" and TOS proper. By mine? Not so much.
And of course, The Picard Show picks up after the destruction of Romulus as told by Spock Prime in the mindmeld flashback of ST'09.
By their standard, Nimoy in the reboot movies is definitely the same Spock from TOS, who had an angsty beard phase between "The Cage" and TOS proper. By mine? Not so much.
And of course, The Picard Show picks up after the destruction of Romulus as told by Spock Prime in the mindmeld flashback of ST'09.
I took at as tongue in cheek. I got a kick out of it and took the recap and the spirit it was intended in, which was, "Yeah, yeah, we know it looks different. Let's just have some fun with it." Which is why they did the recap in the silly way they did it.
Amen, I agree with you. Now, can you baptism me and let me join your Church of trek?
But, seriously, I agree with you. I treat Discovery as an alternate Universe.
I used to be a Trek canon hawk. So I'm probably not the best person to be leading a non-canoninational Church of Trek.
Did you follow the Klingons between TOS - TMP and TWOK?
Those where changes that needed to be made. Even in 1979 the TOS looked dated AF.
Plus a visual update is ok, it fundamental changing the story that's the problem.
I dont think Discovery has done that however.
When Roddenberry spoke about the change in Klingons for TMP, he said something like [I'm paraphrasing, but this was his assertion] "The Klingons in TOS are intended to look exactly like they do in TMP; just ignore the differences in makeup".
So going by that tradition started by Roddenberry with TMP, we use that philosophy in reverse and simply imagine that the stuff in the Cage we saw in that "previously on..." was supposed to look like what we now see in DSC.
And while I can respect that position (as I've told BillJ that I respect his position on it), I still disagree with it....and will keep trying to change minds
Taking Roddenberry's idea about the TMP Klingons a step further, we can use his TMP philosophy of "Klingons are intended to look the same in TOS and TMP" to also imagine that the look of DSC is supposed to look like TOS. So ignoring the look, nothing presented on DSC so far concerning the characters shown and the stories told directly contradicts TOS, so I certainly see DSC directly leading to TOS -- which is what the showrunners has said is the intention.
Therefore to that end, considering the stories and characters in DSC will lead us to TOS, I can absolutely see this show as being part of the same universe as TOS. If someone has an issue with the differences in look, just imagine TOS looked like this, just like Roddenberry told us to imagine the TOS Klingons look like TMP Klingons.
The bottom line for me is simple:
The DSC story is intended to lead us to TOS; therefore it is the same universe as TOS, overlooking the aesthetic difference in a similar manner to how we overlooked the Klingon differences between TMP to TOS.
Last edited:
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but given that TCW/Enterprise preceeded any onscreen references to "Prime" then it's at least as logical that "Prime" was created by the TCW and it is the reason why Discovery looks different to TOS (on the other hand, there are some indications that the differences will iron out by the end of the century (the late TOS movies appear to be intact)
Makes two of us.It more fun for me, to think of ways to make it fit 'In Universe' rather than tearing it apart because it's different.
But I've always been a Half Full kinda person rather than the opposite.
No it didn't. (Not in 1979).
I have to disagree. I think the look of TOS as being a vision of the future was dated in 1979, which I feel is the main reason Roddenberry felt it necessary to change the look of the old TOS designs so much when the film came out.
Sure, we can chalk up the changes in-universe as being due to changes in in-universe technology in the 5-ish years between the end of TOS's mission in 2270-ish and the 2275-ish time frame of TMP.....
......but I think it's obvious that the main reason Roddenberry changed so much of the visuals was that he wanted to update the entire look of Star Trek to bring it to a 1979-level imagining of the future rather than a 1966-level imagining.
Last edited:
Similar threads
